Advice for open book?

How does that impact the REAL question at issue(answer it dosnt) you just want to pretend to have a victory.

Explain how you think it makes ANY impact on the question we had at issue?(can you even remember any more)

It took so long for you to give me a yes or no that I barely remember what the issue was.

I think my point was that when you're testing for relatively advanced knowledge (e.g. calculus), you want to remove very basic skills (e.g. arithmetic) as a variable, since pretty much anyone who's taking calculus will have mastered arithmetic, and any variation in terms in arithmetic is probably coming down to random chance.

Same thing with law school exams: if you're pretty confident that everybody has the ability to memorize the black letter law (which is, frankly, pretty easy to do), then you want to remove memorization as a variable, since pretty much anyone who's at one of the very top schools has the ability to memorize the black letter law.

And your view is the complete opposite: make the calculus test about arithmetic, make the legal analysis about memorization of the law.

It's basically just an entry barrier. People don't actually give legal advice based on what they have memorized for the bar exam. I mean it's fine if you have a general sense of what the answer to a question should be based on what you DO remember, but you would always go back and check to make sure it was right because you gave legal advice. It would be irresponsible not to. There's too much law out there for anyone to contain it all in one's brain long-term.